That is a lot like saying that you have a friend, a good man, who provides for the needy through organizations such as World Vision, and also constantly helps neighbours in need. However, when he gets angry at people, he kills them. Just two sides of his personality. No contradiction here, "except in minds insufficiently committed to reasoning from all the data."

Actually, the Christian position is not at all like the example you gave. I never said that when God gets angry with people He kills them. It is more like saying, "I have a friend, a good man, who provides for the needy through organizations such as World Vision, and also constantly helps neighbours in need. He is also a district judge, and he punished his own son, whom he loved, because the young man was a serial killer."

A judge who punishes criminals justly is acting in love to society. A judge who does not punish criminals, or who punishes them less than justly, is cowardly and unloving. Just ask the parents of the victims killed in prison by a convicted murderer serving a life sentence. Add to this that those same parents have to work to pay the taxes that provide free housing, food and medical care for the man who murdered their son, for the rest of that man's leisurely life. This is your idea of love?

I know of course you will come back with your notion that God's character can be inconsistent since He is God.

I don't know why you think I would say a thing as stupid as that, when I have argued consistently that there is no inconsistency in God. If you think a good man, who is a judge handing down severe, but just, sentences is an inconsistent man, then I can see why you have a problem with God the way He has revealed Himself. I should think you would rather get to know the God who declared repeatedly what He is like, than to change Him into a god more suited to your temperaments.

Maybe the problem is not with God, maybe it is man that is not good. Maybe good men are not good after all. I have talked to good men who do alot of good, but who just do not 'want' to associate with the truth of God (or the truth about themselves).Further so, many a good religious men, who when asked do they 'love' God, don't (or love people in general). I don't often ask, but if I could ask men 'do you want to live a pure and Holy life with God and Godly people for eternity?'I just don't see 100% of men saying so, and really wanting to, no matter how long they had to think about it. God doesn't have to ask the questions, He knows the end from the beginning, and He knows men.

It may be quite possible that not everyone wants to live in Holiness and love with God for eternity; this is just the way scripture paints it. Scripture describes many men as hostile, haters of God, lovers of sin, growing worse and worse, etc. Scripture, most every book, has some men growing worse right into the end even into Revelation, some will never change and God knows it. So God is not the problem it is man.

As a Conditionalist, I don't think God is evil or unjust, or a hypocrite, just Omniscient. Those who want to believe, repent, love God, love others, and 'want' to be be holy, will live with God and do so without regret. Those who would rather not, don't care, whatever, will not. God let’s them just die, that's His mercy on them. And yet the truly wicked and evil will be punished for their specific sins, as it is only just and right. Maybe God shows some mercy to them there, but punishment is not vengeance, and it would be terribly unjust to 'only' annihilate them, or let them die unrewarded.

God is creating an eternal world to follow this one, this is not about this world, but it is the foundation of the world to follow. The point of this world seems to be: By His Word was the world formed, and His Word will Rule, and be Believed in in all the world to come. Anything that does not believe His Word and have Faith is sin. Gods Word is final and He will bring it to pass, the thing that sins will die, this will be true in heaven and eternity also, so God is going to be darn sure no one is going to be 'considering' sin again, or 'wondering' about the 'consequences', because they will be able to see the memory of this earth and the smoke from Gods Judgments rising up still;"... and he looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the valley, and he saw, and behold, the smoke of the land ascended like the smoke of a furnace" (Genesis 19:28)"... Its streams will be turned into pitch, and its loose earth into brimstone, and its land will become burning pitch. 10 It will not be quenched night or day; its smoke will go up forever..." (Isaiah 34:10)"... and were crying out as they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, 'What city is like the great city?" (Rev. 18:18)

I think God‘s plan is to gather to himself, and spend eternity with, all who will recognize him as God; and every man, woman and child uniquely fills a small part of God‘s big plan, like puzzle pieces created for this purpose.

So God permits sin although he hates it because he places a very high value on free will and because the evil freely done by humans is part of his plan and worldwide mission. (Joseph's brothers, Judas, and Pilate are all examples of this.) How could the rape of a young child be permitted by God and be part of God's plan? I can think of numerous ways that God could use this event to influence people to consider good and evil, the meaning of life, and whether or not there might be more to life than what we see in the here and now.

I am not saying that God causes the evil that is a part of his plan. I am saying that he knew every evil deed that would be committed by humans (as well as every good deed) and he put his plan into action because apparently the good outweighs the bad (and sometimes the bad brings about the good).

Let me boldly state the obvious. If you are not sure whether you heard directly from God, you didn’t.~Garry Friesen

Steve, you wrote:A judge who punishes criminals justly is acting in love to society. A judge who does not punish criminals, or who punishes them less than justly, is cowardly and unloving. Just ask the parents of the victims killed in prison by a convicted murderer serving a life sentence. Add to this that those same parents have to work to pay the taxes that provide free housing, food and medical care for the man who murdered their son, for the rest of that man's leisurely life. This is your idea of love?

I haven't suggested that nothing should be done about crime. I just don't think that retributive justice does anyone any good—neither the criminals nor the victims. I can see that killing a murderer will prevent him from murdering again, but the problem is that many innocent persons have received death sentences, and that is a much greater injustice than not putting to death a person guilty of murder.

Besides "retributive justice" is a way of viewing justice through a single lens. Have you ever considered "restorative justice" as a way of viewing justice? I recommend Howard Zehr's excellent book Changing Lenses, 1990, Herald Press, Scotdale, Pa. 15683.

You can purchase it from Amazon.com for only eleven dollars. Here is the link:

I was not seeking your opinion about criminal justice. You missed my point completely. I pointed out that your view of inconsistency is flawed. A man who is a judge must penalize criminals, out of benevolence to society. His doing so is not inconsistent with his general virtue, but is an exhibition of it. The same is true with God.